June 10, 2016

I thought it couldn't be Warren because she's one of the Democratic Senators whose vacated seat would give a Republican governor the power to name the replacement. But I guess the need to win the presidency could supersede the desire to control the Senate.

I would guess that today's meeting is more about getting Warren lined up to lend her support to Hillary's campaign where it will be most helpful and to perform a little theater for us out here in the public. We can talk about the VP possibilities and what it would mean to have a ticket with 2 women.

Okay, let me do that for a second: Hillary just reveled in the history-makingness of her being the first woman to get a major-party nomination for the presidency. Why would she like that historical distinction to be immediately intruded upon by a second woman, sharing a second distinction, the first 2-woman major party ticket? I'll just gesture subtly at the "other woman" theme in Hillary's life and say that her preference is probably to stand alone as the woman, not to be there with another woman. I know some people are putting it in terms of whether America is ready for 2 women, as if it's America's fault for being so sexist, but I think Hillary herself doesn't and shouldn't want to share the stage with another woman.

Especially Elizabeth Warren. Elizabeth Warren is such a passionate speaker that it's actually pretty weird. If you align with her on the issues, you may think it's absolutely wonderful, but if you don't, you might feel very uneasy, as I did watching her on the Rachel Maddow show last night. Warren gets so excited, it's like she's in the middle of a heated argument. It's very theatrical. That alone could be off-putting to many people, if we were just deciding if we wanted to hand power to her. But think about the set of her and Hillary. Hillary's style is so emotionally flat, it's almost robotic. Why would you pair that with Warren? If it were a TV show, it might be great fun — a kind of Kirk and Spock effect, but with Spock in the captain's chair.

I don't care enough about "Star Trek" to know if there was ever an episode or movie plot where Spock got to be captain and Kirk was subordinated. If so, how'd that work out? Badly, right? The emotionless one in command would replicate traditional patriarchy, and the emotional, subordinated one would seem like a traditional wife. In traditional wife-and-husband stories where there is an emotionally vibrant wife and an stony, logical husband, the story would almost certainly have the wife ultimately undermining the husband's attempted domination.

129 comments:

The thing about reading Hillary is that she cannot be read as a text, like Shakespeare, where scholars assume that the meaning of every comma was fully intended in all of its implications by "The Bard." No, Hillary is pretty much a bumbling idiot, as her military adventurism shows, and you can't read her actions that way.

You can speculate as to the effects of a Hillary move, but you can't really ponder intention, she is too uneven, there us no intellectual foundation on which to plant your feet.

The main difference between Kirk and Hillary is that Kirk's recklessness generally paid off, largely due to the fact that he is fictional, and Hillary's recklessness has led to huge disasters, if you doubt me, look at the refugee crisis in Europe.

Warren ran behind Obama in Massachsetts. I can't see her being an asset to the Hillary campaign. I am afraid that Hillary and Elizabeth would come across as a couple of harpies come to torture those who are on the wrong side of history. Hillary should bask in the glory of being the first major party nominee who identifies as a woman.

Ms. Clinton should beat Trump easily if she can get out the vote. But despite the databases and call banks, she has zero ability to inspire anyone in the middle or far left to make the effort.

She has a Hobson's choice. Lock up the left with Warren or some other Sanders' surrogate. Or try to lock up the undecided center by finding some Democratic moderate with appeal in the Midwest. But who would that be? Chaffee? O'Malley? There's no Democratic moderate left with a constituency.

Ernestine will want someone that can b trusted from within SMERSH, which would be a bit thick, or a clueless Tammany Brave like Joe Bidenl, who can safely be left outside and nobody will pay attention to him.Cherokee Liz will demand lots of attention be paid to her, so, no.

If the U.S. Constitution has a flaw, it is that it provides for a Vice-President as a President-in-waiting. It would be better to just eliminate the office.

If the U.S. Constitution has a flaw, it is that it provides for a Vice-President as a President-in-waiting. It would be better to just eliminate the office.

At the time it was necessary to ensure the succession of power if the president died. This is no longer necessary after the 20th Amendment, and the creation of the presidential succession list. We would still need someone to break Senate ties, but that could be given to the president.

Bill Clinton chose Al Gore as his running mate. Gore did not provide any type of gegraphic or ideological balance. He was chosen as an intensifier rather than as a modifier. It worked for her husband. Maybe she feels that it will work for her.......(People forget, but, at one time, Gore was considered a southern moderate. He came from a long and distinguished family of segregationists, and his wife didn't like rap music. It was also felt, back then, that he had a happier, more stable marriage than the Clintons.)..........Warren demonstrates that a woman doesn't have to be shrill or artificial to be annoying. Sadly, Bella Abzug is no longer available to serve as Hilary's veep.

There is something unstable and ominous feeling about such a 2 woman power team. We all feel that, even if we can't exactly explain it. Two ambitious men is bad enough, but these two women sounds like anything but a "team".

"Vote for Grandma and the Squaw""Pantsuits and Moccasins in every closet""Hillary wants your wampum""Warren and Clinton put the red and white into red, white, and blue""Let's scalp Trump!""Me Hillary, She Tonto""Trump's Last Stand""Hillary Clinton: A true kemosabe""Emails and Females, 2016""Clinton/Warren: Let's delete the past 8 years"

There was the episode where Kirk, McCoy, Scott, and Uhura changed places with their parallel universe counterparts. Our Spock spotted the exchange immediately and had the exchanged Kirk thrown in the brig. Evil Jim tried to bargain pitifully, offering credits (i.e. money) and/or something better (Power, Spock? Is that want you want? I can get that for you!) Evil Spock is the parallel universe was pretty cool. He broke Imperial Regulations to warn Good Jim about orders to assassinate him. The best thing about Evil Spock was his no nonsense approach to things, especially discipline — Your agonizer, please. President Trump should put DARPA to work on one for government employees. Imagine THE DONALD calling Lois Lerner on the Oval Office carpet and saying, "Your agonizer, please." I think we'd see a rapid change in those inside the beltway attitudes. A little servile groveling is good for republics.

Hey, two corrupt unlikeable women on the ticket. That'll work wonders.

Warren ran behind Obama in Massachsetts

That's always the stumbling block in her cult of personality. Warren hasn't exactly done great in elections. She didn't destroy Scott Brown in a Democratic year. in, arguably, the most Democratic state.

The Vice President has to be a good soldier. It's hard to see Warren quietly falling in line if Hillary feels the need to say or do something hawkish or otherwise not Hard Left. I don't see Hillary doing this unless she thinks she has to in order to win.

Elizabeth Warren seems like the type of person who would enjoy telling people how much they suck.

I do like Martha's analogy of Hillary - Elizabeth ticket being like two of your most unpleasant high school teachers. Get ready for 8 years of finger wagging and accusations of being naughty! Long live the Croneocracy.

One of the interesting things about Sarah Palin's vice presidential candidacy was that she realized that the VP was legislative. She also realized that the VP did have some powers in the Senate. Not many and not too significant at the moment but something to build on. She told us that she "was going to be an activist vice-president" and I think she meant it.

Prior to LBJ accepting the job, the Senate Majority Leader position had pretty much no power and nobody ever wanted it. It was the kind of thing that you got elected to when you stepped out to take a leak. LBJ started by nibbling around the edges and turned it into one of the most powerful jobs in government when he had it. I think this is what Palin had in mind. Caro's Master of the Senate, which I think Ann is currently reading, goes into quite a lot of detail on how he did this.

Not to go all Godwin but Stalin was kind of a nobody and took the job of party secretary when nobody else wanted it. When he took it, it was basically keeping records of meetings and so on. Look what he did with that.

Honestly, I don't think voters are moved much by VP picks anymore. I may be wrong, but the main criteria used to be geographic balance, but the favorite son phenomenon has waned in these days of greater partisanship. Ryan did not carry Wisconsin, Edwards did not carry North Carolina, and Gore did not carry Tennessee when he was on top of the ticket. The only thing you want to avoid is picking someone who will make the top of the ticket look bad, but with the media as it is that may not longer be a concern. The Democrats selected a know-nothing blabbermouth bungler in Biden and the media covered up for him when they could have had a dedicated segment for his idiocy every day. The Republicans selected a pretty, energetic female governor from Alaska. She certainly had flaws, but we primarily got non-stop stories about tanning beds, SNL skits, and faked pregnancies. I would say that the only requirements these days are alive and no felonies, but the Democratic Party has made it clear that the latter is optional and the former can be worked around.

Advisers warned Coolidge, who wore the headdress while being named an honorary chief in Deadwood, South Dakota, that he would look funny. “Well it’s good for people to laugh, isn’t it?” Coolidge replied.

This whole business about why would she do this, and Warren would be a fraud, is beside the point. Progs want power. They'll calculate whether Warren as VP is best to shore up the left flank and GOTV. Of course, Warren will entirely discount Hill's shilling for Goldman-Sachs and Wall Street, since she knows the woman has no principle other than herself. She will calculate only whether the VP slot will help turn Hill left. The answer to both may be yes, so Warren has a good shot at VP.

Ancestry.com could solve Warrens problem for $95Its more than good enough to find 2-5% Native American. Many "native" white people have this dating to early in the European settlement, so its good odds for her. Heck, because of uncertainties it very likely could give plausible false positives for some trace of a related connection, like East Asian or Eskimo, which not infrequently and possibly spuriously show up also on European samples. I wonder why she hasnt.

Mix Hillary's cronyism and criminality with Warren's socialism, marinate for fifteen years and Venezuela is what you get. Hillary's pick will be crucial if she (God forbid) be elected: too sane and competent then she runs the real risk of getting impeached and removed or she finds someone to be her Biden (is there anyone out there that bad that thought of removing her and replacing her would be anathema?).

Hillary needs to win to stay out jail and to keep her minions out of jail. She should be running for President of The United Mexican States where that is a reasonable cause to seek the office of president.

There currently are services that will sequence your whole genome for around $1000. They could identify any uniquely Native American markers and remove all doubt and ambiguity... assuming she actually wants or cares to do so. But I doubt that.

At any rate, it doesn't matter if she lied to get preferential treatment. It's all good if you've got a (D) in front of your name.

The best thing about Evil Spock was his no nonsense approach to things, especially discipline — Your agonizer, please. President Trump should put DARPA to work on one for government employees. Imagine THE DONALD calling Lois Lerner on the Oval Office carpet and saying, "Your agonizer, please."

The real Pocahontas has a great number of descendants, heavily skewed to prominent and wealthy families, so Indian descent in trace amounts is hardly a handicap in itself. Warrens career seems to have been based on flimflam on both sides, hers and the characters that probably encouraged her to take that line in order to give her a preference for reasons of academic politics. She was groomed for her track in the cursus honorum, its clear. She was a "made man", or woman, in her own "family" of the Democratic mafia.Samples of sausage-making like this are what turns people paranoid and disrespectful of prominent institutions. They are revealed as petty, grasping and low minded as the rest of us.

There were times where Spock did have to take command, though other than the movie reboot I cannot think of a time where Kirk was a subordinate officer to Spock. It usually occurred because Kirk was not physically present, or Kirk was relieved of command, or, in one case, Kirk was replaced by an evil mirror universe doppelganger and was promptly thrown in the brig. In Star Trek IV Kirk is the Captain of the Enterprise, but Spock is technically in charge of the mission as he is the lead diplomat.

The thing about Kirk and Spock is their leadership styles rubbed off on each other. Spock became more and more willing to take risks thanks to Kirk's influence, though not to the same extent as Kirk would be willing to go, while Kirk seemed to become more calculated in his risks as time went on.

Oh, and Vulcans can lie. It's never been clear to me if the "no lying" thing is outright propaganda promulgated by the Vulcans to get an edge on other species, or if was some sort of misleading technicality. Vulcans are known dissemble, not volunteer information, not correct improper assumptions, provide technically true answers that are misleading, speak in code, etc. Straight up lying is very rare though.

The story is the danger that this "meeting" can make Huma into a very angry lover. A betrayed lover who knows her insider dirt is not what Hillary needs at this moment of the FBI Criminal Investigation.

Two Star Trek episodes come to mind that, according to Wikipedia, appeared back to back in the first season.

The first was "The Galileo Seven" in which Spock is put in command of a shuttlecraft mission to a planet cut off from the Enterprise where his emotionless, flat leadership style creates resentment and one problem after another. Only when Spock gives in to an emotional act of desperation at the end is the group saved.

The next episode is "The Squire of Gothos." In this episode, a virtually all-powerful, but emotionally stunted and capricious alien named Trelane reminiscent of no one so much as Liberace abuses his power and delights in tormenting anyone who challenges or insults him. At the end of the episode, Trelane is revealed to be a child and his even-more-powerful parents put an end to his abuses.

If Hillary somehow survives the next 2 months she will pick booker. She needs the cool male head on the ticket and she needs to stop the bleeding in the black vote where Trump is in the mid twenties and climbing. Warren does little for Hillary among the Bernie bros but she needs her support. They are talking cabinet positions or head of the SEC.

Again, Gracie Burns as candidate for the Surprise Party in 1940 did it first, and better.

The obvious choice for VP is Bernie Sanders, if Hillary had any doubts about winning the election. That he is not being named indicates Hillary already is sure of enough fraudulent votes, to be produced as needed, to overcome any Trump total vote count.

Warren is in the same camp as Clinton. Warren has gone after the disposable retail bits of corruption, not the true corporatist stuff, and every regulation she wants to add is in itself yet another item that promotes monopolies, the bread and butter of corporatism. They are fine and compatible.

I don't think the Senate being in play is the real stickler- the seat would revert to the Democrats in 2018 anyway (and that assumes Baker is even allowed to fill the seat- I am all but certain he won't be allowed to do so).

The bigger problem is that Clinton has already been pulled far to the left in the primary, and really needs to find a way back the center to shore up the the weaknesses in the midwest. I think Evan Bayh is a far more likely choice.

I don't know if many feel the same way, but Warren is really hard to look at. She kind of reminds me of Buck Owens and his homely face, only with his grandma's hairdo. She looks like she is sucking on a lemon all the time.

Yeah, she's very Calvinist in her appearance, a New England Protestant fence post. I can easily imagine her as a member of the Salem tribunal, judging and passing sentence on accused witches, stern and humorless.

Okay, let me do that for a second: Hillary just reveled in the history-makingness of her being the first woman to get a major-party nomination for the presidency. Why would she like that historical distinction to be immediately intruded upon by a second woman, sharing a second distinction, the first 2-woman major party ticket?

Not just a second woman, but a Native-American woman. I think, in today's America, a Native-American woman vice-president outranks a mere woman president, like a flush beats a straight.

I think Obama will offer her a deal: "choose me as your running mate, and we won't prosecute you." Then he'll have her assassinated and he'll be president again - I think that'll get around the 22nd Amendment.

But Vice President = head (President) of the Senate. Article 1, section 3

Legislative, not executive, branch.

You do remember that originally the vice president was the presidential candidate that came in second?

I guarantee you that Adams and Jefferson were not running to become the head of the Senate. Your confusion comes from the changes made after the election of 1800, but the vice president still runs for office as a member of the executive branch, not the legislative.

I think Obama will offer her a deal: "choose me as your running mate, and we won't prosecute you." Then he'll have her assassinated and he'll be president again - I think that'll get around the 22nd Amendment.

Nope.

12th Amendment:

"no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice President of the United States."

Oh, and Vulcans can lie. It's never been clear to me if the "no lying" thing is outright propaganda promulgated by the Vulcans to get an edge on other species, or if was some sort of misleading technicality. Vulcans are known dissemble, not volunteer information, not correct improper assumptions, provide technically true answers that are misleading, speak in code, etc. Straight up lying is very rare though.

I always associated Spock's less-than-honesty with his human side!

It's kind of touching, the idea of a super-smart race of people who are incapable of lying. Wow, you are so vulnerable!

Blogger Gahrie said...I think Obama will offer her a deal: "choose me as your running mate, and we won't prosecute you." Then he'll have her assassinated and he'll be president again - I think that'll get around the 22nd Amendment.

Nope.

12th Amendment:

"no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice President of the United States."

It only says that and means what you think it means if Obama doesn't get his judge on SCOTUS.

The plain meaning of the constitution won't mean any such thing anymore.

If Hillary wants to keep the most devoted Bernie voters, she couldn't do better than Tom Perez, Secretary of Labor:

Perez has more credibility with committed progressives — who measure politicians by their battle scars — than almost anyone else around. The unions love him so much that they campaigned against his nomination to replace Eric Holder as attorney general in late 2014 because they didn’t want to lose him at the Labor Department.

He’s spent years working at the Justice Department on voting rights, civil rights and police misconduct, right in the center of issues that have exploded among African-Americans and progressive Democrats. He’s adored in the White House, where he’s been a main player in crafting the Obama second-term domestic agenda, and he’s got a knack for a fiery stump speech. Also, he’s Dominican. And unlike Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro, the other Latino Cabinet secretary and more frequent subject of VP speculation (to whom nearly every conversation about Perez becomes at least an implicit comparison), Perez speaks fluent Spanish.

Or worse, he is a rabid partisan who recommended DoL follow the Roman practice of destroying a town to warn the other towns of the consequences of defying the Emperor. Hillary would love that. He would be good impeachment insurance, though.

"I thought it couldn't be Warren because she's one of the Democratic Senators whose vacated seat would give a Republican governor the power to name the replacement. But I guess the need to win the presidency could supersede the desire to control the Senate."

I don't think that concern applies. If I remember correctly, when Ted Kennedy died, no one was appointed to his seat because the Mass Legislature had amended the law (when another Rep named Romney was governor) to remove the governor's power to appoint a successor. Instead, in Mass, state law requires a quick election to fill a vacant Senate seat. Of course, Scott Brown won but that kind of fluke event is unlikely to be repeated in Mass. So the 'control of the Senate' factor is really not in play.

What makes you think Trump needs to pick a Republican? As an early Trump supporter and volunteer I'd be happy to have him name Ivanka. She's honest, smart, good looking, well spoken, and very loyal, which is more than you can say about any of the other Republicans you are thinking of for the office.

Our (my) goal for Trump is to destroy the GOP Democrat Uniparty and replace it with us, the US party. Trump 2016, Ivanka 2024.

Gahrie said...Nope.12th Amendment:"no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice President of the United States."

I dunno, I think it could still work: the 22nd doesn't say Obama's ineligible to be president, at least any more than he was before, or that a person can't be pres more than twice. It says that a person can't get elected president more than twice:

"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once."

Okay, let me do that for a second: Hillary just reveled in the history-makingness of her being the first woman to get a major-party nomination for the presidency. Why would she like that historical distinction to be immediately intruded upon by a second woman, sharing a second distinction, the first 2-woman major party ticket?

Lol. You don't get it. In Hillary's lizard brain, there's no problem that can't be solved with MOAR ESTROGEN!!!

What makes you think Trump needs to pick a Republican? As an early Trump supporter and volunteer I'd be happy to have him name Ivanka. She's honest, smart, good looking, well spoken, and very loyal, which is more than you can say about any of the other Republicans you are thinking of for the office.